Methodological Trends in Secondary Education and Transition Research: Looking Backward and Moving Forward

Autor/inn/en	Carter, Erik W.; Brock, Matthew E.; Bottema-Beutel, Kristen; Bartholomew, Audrey; Boehm, Thomas L.; Cease-Cook, Jennifer
Titel	Methodological Trends in Secondary Education and Transition Research: Looking Backward and Moving Forward
Quelle	In: Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 36 (2013) 1, S.15-24 (10 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	Weitere Informationen
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	2165-1434
DOI	10.1177/2165143413475659
Schlagwörter	Educational Trends; Trend Analysis; Secondary Education; Transitional Programs; Career Development; Research Methodology; Journal Articles; Bibliometrics; Intervention; Literature Reviews; Best Practices; Data Collection; Research Design; Disabilities; Special Needs Students; Developmental Studies Programs + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Bildungsentwicklung; Trendanalyse; Sekundarbereich; Berufsentwicklung; Research method; Forschungsmethode; Journal article; Zeitschriftenaufsatz; Bibliometrie; Data capture; Datensammlung; Forschungsdesign; Handicap; Behinderung; Sonderpädagogischer Förderbedarf; Developmental studies; Developmental psychology; Study; Studies; Entwicklungspsychologie; Studium
Abstract	Prevailing policy and practice in the field of transition emphasizes the importance of designing services and supports based on research-based practices. We reviewed every article published across the 35-year history of "Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals" (CDTEI) to document methodological trends in research focused on equipping youth and young adults with disabilities for adulthood. Although experimental research articles have assumed increasing prominence within the journal since the late 1980s, the vast majority of published studies could be characterized as primarily descriptive in focus. While almost one quarter of research articles involved some type of intervention evaluation, only 25 studies reported using research designs that could allow causal claims to be made. The data collection approaches used in these studies were quite diverse, with self-report surveys and questionnaires representing the dominant approach. We summarize the current methodological legacy of CDTEI and offer some modest recommendations for where the field might go next in its efforts to conduct rigorous research that enables youth with disabilities to flourish. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	SAGE Publications and Hammill Institute on Disabilities. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: http://sagepub.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10